- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Balancing quasi-Bragg regime and velocity selectivity in quantum-enhanced atom interferometry

Christian M. Karres*,†, Daniel Derr, and Enno Giese

  • *Present address: Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, QUANTUM, Institut für Physik, Staudingerweg 7, 55128 Mainz, Germany.
  • †Contact author: christian-karres@gmx.de, karresch@uni-mainz.de
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033247 – Published 31 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/wr69-9hr5

Abstract

Spin squeezing in atomic ensembles enables atom interferometry with sensitivities below the shot-noise limit, but the associated entanglement is highly susceptible to loss, making imperfections in atom optics a central limitation. Bragg diffraction is an established technique for driving transitions between atomic momentum states and enables large-momentum transfer through higher-order diffraction while preserving the internal state. However, it is intrinsically limited by two competing mechanisms: Short light pulses induce parasitic diffraction into off-resonant orders beyond an effective two-level description, while long pulses face velocity selectivity. We derive analytical expressions in a second-quantized framework for the atom optics and phase uncertainty of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer including these effects. We demonstrate that sub-shot-noise scaling is achieved only in a regime of intermediate pulse duration. Furthermore, we show that deleterious effects of higher-order diffraction are partially mitigated by optimizing the input quantum state.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (85)

  1. J. Rudolph, W. Herr, C. Grzeschik, T. Sternke, A. Grote, M. Popp, D. Becker, H. Müntinga, H. Ahlers, A. Peters, C. Lämmerzahl, K. Sengstock, N. Gaaloul, W. Ertmer, and E. M. Rasel, A high-flux BEC source for mobile atom interferometers, New J. Phys. 17, 065001 (2015).
  2. A. Herbst, T. Estrampes, H. Albers, V. Vollenkemper, K. Stolzenberg, S. Bode, E. Charron, E. M. Rasel, N. Gaaloul, and D. Schlippert, High-flux source system for matter-wave interferometry exploiting tunable interactions, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013139 (2024).
  3. D. Savoie, M. Altorio, B. Fang, L. A. Sidorenkov, R. Geiger, and A. Landragin, Interleaved atom interferometry for high-sensitivity inertial measurements, Sci. Adv. 4, eaau7948 (2018).
  4. M. Schilling, É. Wodey, L. Timmen, D. Tell, K. H. Zipfel, D. Schlippert, C. Schubert, E. M. Rasel, and J. Müller, Gravity field modelling for the Hannover 10 m atom interferometer, J. Geod. 94, 122 (2020).
  5. L. Zhou, Z. Y. Xiong, W. Yang, B. Tang, W. C. Peng, K. Hao, R. B. Li, M. Liu, J. Wang, and M. S. Zhan, Development of an atom gravimeter and status of the 10-meter atom interferometer for precision gravity measurement, Gen. Relativ. Gravit. 43, 1931 (2011).
  6. T. Kovachy, P. Asenbaum, C. Overstreet, C. A. Donnelly, S. M. Dickerson, A. Sugarbaker, J. M. Hogan, and M. A. Kasevich, Quantum superposition at the half-metre scale, Nature (London) 528, 530 (2015).
  7. H. Müntinga, H. Ahlers, M. Krutzik, A. Wenzlawski, S. Arnold, D. Becker, K. Bongs, H. Dittus, H. Duncker, N. Gaaloul, et al., Interferometry with Bose-Einstein condensates in microgravity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 093602 (2013).
  8. M. D. Lachmann, H. Ahlers, D. Becker, A. N. Dinkelaker, J. Grosse, O. Hellmig, H. Müntinga, V. Schkolnik, S. T. Seidel, T. Wendrich, et al., Ultracold atom interferometry in space, Nat. Commun. 12, 1317 (2021).
  9. E. R. Elliott, D. C. Aveline, N. P. Bigelow, P. Boegel, S. Botsi, E. Charron, J. P. D’Incao, P. Engels, T. Estrampes, N. Gaaloul et al., Quantum gas mixtures and dual-species atom interferometry in space, Nature (London) 623, 502 (2023).
  10. J. R. Williams, C. A. Sackett, H. Ahlers, D. C. Aveline, P. Boegel, S. Botsi, E. Charron, E. R. Elliott, N. Gaaloul, E. Giese, et al., Pathfinder experiments with atom interferometry in the Cold Atom Lab onboard the International Space Station, Nat. Commun. 15, 6414 (2024).
  11. B. Barrett, L. Antoni-Micollier, L. Chichet, B. Battelier, T. Lévèque, A. Landragin, and P. Bouyer, Dual matter-wave inertial sensors in weightlessness, Nat. Commun. 7, 13786 (2016).
  12. J. M. McGuirk, M. J. Snadden, and M. A. Kasevich, Large area light-pulse atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 4498 (2000).
  13. H. Müller, S.-w. Chiow, Q. Long, S. Herrmann, and S. Chu, Atom interferometry with up to 24-photon-momentum-transfer beam splitters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 180405 (2008).
  14. S.-w. Chiow, T. Kovachy, H.-C. Chien, and M. A. Kasevich, 102ℏk Large area atom interferometers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 130403 (2011).
  15. J. Rudolph, T. Wilkason, M. Nantel, H. Swan, C. M. Holland, Y. Jiang, B. E. Garber, S. P. Carman, and J. M. Hogan, Large momentum transfer clock atom interferometry on the 689 nm intercombination line of strontium, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 083604 (2020).
  16. M. Gebbe, J.-N. Siemß, M. Gersemann, H. Müntinga, S. Herrmann, C. Lämmerzahl, H. Ahlers, N. Gaaloul, C. Schubert, K. Hammerer, S. Abend, and E. M. Rasel, Twin-lattice atom interferometry, Nat. Commun. 12, 2544 (2021).
  17. L. Pezzè, A. Smerzi, M. K. Oberthaler, R. Schmied, and P. Treutlein, Quantum metrology with nonclassical states of atomic ensembles, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 035005 (2018).
  18. S. S. Szigeti, O. Hosten, and S. A. Haine, Improving cold-atom sensors with quantum entanglement: Prospects and challenges, Appl. Phys. Lett. 118, 140501 (2021).
  19. F. Fitzek, J.-N. Kirsten-Siemß, E. M. Rasel, N. Gaaloul, and K. Hammerer, Accurate and efficient Bloch-oscillation-enhanced atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L032028 (2024).
  20. R. H. Parker, C. Yu, W. Zhong, B. Estey, and H. Müller, Measurement of the fine-structure constant as a test of the Standard Model, Science 360, 191 (2018).
  21. T. Kovachy, J. M. Hogan, D. M. S. Johnson, and M. A. Kasevich, Optical lattices as waveguides and beam splitters for atom interferometry: An analytical treatment and proposal of applications, Phys. Rev. A 82, 013638 (2010).
  22. P. Cladé, Bloch oscillations in atom interferometry, Riv. Nuovo Cim. 38, 173 (2015).
  23. L. Morel, Z. Yao, P. Cladé, and S. Guellati-Khélifa, Determination of the fine-structure constant with an accuracy of 81 parts per trillion, Nature (London) 588, 61 (2020).
  24. P. J. Martin, B. G. Oldaker, A. H. Miklich, and D. E. Pritchard, Bragg scattering of atoms from a standing light wave, Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 515 (1988).
  25. T. Mazzoni, X. Zhang, R. Del Aguila, L. Salvi, N. Poli, and G. M. Tino, Large-momentum-transfer Bragg interferometer with strontium atoms, Phys. Rev. A 92, 053619 (2015).
  26. E. Giese, A. Roura, G. Tackmann, E. M. Rasel, and W. P. Schleich, Double Bragg diffraction: A tool for atom optics, Phys. Rev. A 88, 053608 (2013).
  27. H. Müller, S.-w. Chiow, and S. Chu, Atom-wave diffraction between the Raman-Nath and the Bragg regime: Effective Rabi frequency, losses, and phase shifts, Phys. Rev. A 77, 023609 (2008).
  28. J.-N. Siemß, F. Fitzek, S. Abend, E. M. Rasel, N. Gaaloul, and K. Hammerer, Analytic theory for Bragg atom interferometry based on the adiabatic theorem, Phys. Rev. A 102, 033709 (2020).
  29. J. Jenewein, S. Hartmann, A. Roura, and E. Giese, Bragg-diffraction-induced imperfections of the signal in retroreflective atom interferometers, Phys. Rev. A 105, 063316 (2022).
  30. D. Pfeiffer, M. Dietrich, P. Schach, G. Birkl, and E. Giese, Dichroic mirror pulses for optimized higher-order atomic Bragg diffraction, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, L012028 (2025).
  31. Y. Wang, J. Glick, T. Deshpande, K. DeRose, S. Saraf, N. Sachdeva, K. Jiang, Z. Chen, and T. Kovachy, Robust quantum control via multipath interference for thousandfold phase amplification in a resonant atom interferometer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 243403 (2024).
  32. B. Fang, N. Mielec, D. Savoie, M. Altorio, A. Landragin, and R. Geiger, Improving the phase response of an atom interferometer by means of temporal pulse shaping, New J. Phys. 20, 023020 (2018).
  33. T. Wilkason, M. Nantel, J. Rudolph, Y. Jiang, B. E. Garber, H. Swan, S. P. Carman, M. Abe, and J. M. Hogan, Atom interferometry with Floquet atom optics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 183202 (2022).
  34. T. Rodzinka, E. Dionis, L. Calmels, S. Beldjoudi, A. Béguin, D. Guéry-Odelin, B. Allard, D. Sugny, and A. Gauguet, Optimal Floquet state engineering for large scale atom interferometers, Nat. Commun. 15, 10281 (2024).
  35. J. C. Saywell, M. S. Carey, P. S. Light, S. S. Szigeti, A. R. Milne, K. S. Gill, M. L. Goh, V. S. Perunicic, N. M. Wilson, C. D. Macrae, et al., Enhancing the sensitivity of atom-interferometric inertial sensors using robust control, Nat. Commun. 14, 7626 (2023).
  36. S. S. Szigeti, J. E. Debs, J. J. Hope, N. P. Robins, and J. D. Close, Why momentum width matters for atom interferometry with Bragg pulses, New J. Phys. 14, 023009 (2012).
  37. J. Günther, J.-N. Kirsten-Siemß, N. Gaaloul, and K. Hammerer, Squeezing enhancement in lossy multi-path atom interferometers, Quantum 10, 2122 (2026).
  38. J. Goldsmith, J. Hope, and S. Haine, Effects of systematic error on quantum-enhanced atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. A 111, 052608 (2025).
  39. M. Kitagawa and M. Ueda, Squeezed spin states, Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138 (1993).
  40. C. Gross, T. Zibold, E. Nicklas, J. Estève, and M. K. Oberthaler, Nonlinear atom interferometer surpasses classical precision limit, Nature (London) 464, 1165 (2010).
  41. M. F. Riedel, P. Böhi, Y. Li, T. W. Hänsch, A. Sinatra, and P. Treutlein, Atom-chip-based generation of entanglement for quantum metrology, Nature (London) 464, 1170 (2010).
  42. S. S. Szigeti, S. P. Nolan, J. D. Close, and S. A. Haine, High-precision quantum-enhanced gravimetry with a Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 100402 (2020).
  43. Z. Zhang and L.-M. Duan, Generation of massive entanglement through an adiabatic quantum phase transition in a spinor condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 180401 (2013).
  44. B. Lücke, M. Scherer, J. Kruse, L. Pezzé, F. Deuretzbacher, P. Hyllus, O. Topic, J. Peise, W. Ertmer, J. Arlt, L. Santos, A. Smerzi, and C. Klempt, Twin matter waves for interferometry beyond the classical limit, Science 334, 773 (2011).
  45. K. Lange, J. Peise, B. Lücke, I. Kruse, G. Vitagliano, I. Apellaniz, M. Kleinmann, G. Tóth, and C. Klempt, Entanglement between two spatially separated atomic modes, Science 360, 416 (2018).
  46. I. D. Leroux, M. H. Schleier-Smith, and V. Vuletić, Implementation of cavity squeezing of a collective atomic spin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 073602 (2010).
  47. A. Shankar, L. Salvi, M. L. Chiofalo, N. Poli, and M. J. Holland, Squeezed state metrology with Bragg interferometers operating in a cavity, Quantum Sci. Technol. 4, 045010 (2019).
  48. J. D. Wilson, J. T. Reilly, H. Zhang, C. Luo, A. Chu, J. K. Thompson, A. M. Rey, and M. J. Holland, Entangled matter waves for quantum enhanced sensing, Phys. Rev. A 110, L041301 (2024).
  49. C. Luo, H. Zhang, A. Chu, C. Maruko, A. M. Rey, and J. K. Thompson, Hamiltonian engineering of collective XYZ spin models in an optical cavity, Nat. Phys. 21, 916 (2025).
  50. V. Srivastava, S. Jandura, G. K. Brennen, and G. Pupillo, Entanglement-enhanced quantum sensing via optimal global control with neutral atoms in a cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 060806 (2026).
  51. G. P. Greve, C. Luo, B. Wu, and J. K. Thompson, Entanglement-enhanced matter-wave interferometry in a high-finesse cavity, Nature (London) 610, 472 (2022).
  52. B. K. Malia, Y. Wu, J. Martínez-Rincón, and M. A. Kasevich, Distributed quantum sensing with mode-entangled spin-squeezed atomic states, Nature (London) 612, 661 (2022).
  53. L. Salvi, N. Poli, V. Vuletić, and G. M. Tino, Squeezing on momentum states for atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 033601 (2018).
  54. F. Anders, A. Idel, P. Feldmann, D. Bondarenko, S. Loriani, K. Lange, J. Peise, M. Gersemann, B. Meyer-Hoppe, S. Abend, N. Gaaloul, et al., Momentum entanglement for atom interferometry, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 140402 (2021).
  55. C. Cassens, B. Meyer-Hoppe, E. Rasel, and C. Klempt, Entanglement-enhanced atomic gravimeter, Phys. Rev. X 15, 011029 (2025).
  56. R. Corgier, N. Gaaloul, A. Smerzi, and L. Pezzè, Delta-kick squeezing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 183401 (2021).
  57. O. Anton, I. Bröckel, D. Derr, A. Fieguth, M. Franzke, M. Gärtner, E. Giese, J. S. Haase, J. Hamann, A. Heidt, et al., INTENTAS—an entanglement-enhanced atomic sensor for microgravity, EPJ Quantum Technol. 12, 26 (2025).
  58. S. Iso, H. Ohta, and T. Suyama, Secular terms in Dyson series to all orders of perturbation, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2018, 083A01 (2018).
  59. M. Sanz, E. Solano, and I. L. Egusquiza, Beyond adiabatic elimination: Effective Hamiltonians and singular perturbation, in Applications + Practical Conceptualization + Mathematics = Fruitful Innovation, edited by R. S. Anderssen et al. (Springer Japan, Tokyo, 2016), p. 127.
  60. A. Bott, F. Di Pumpo, and E. Giese, Atomic diffraction from single-photon transitions in gravity and standard-model extensions, AVS Quantum Sci. 5, 044402 (2023).
  61. E. Giese, Mechanisms of matter-wave diffraction and their application to interferometers, Fortschr. Phys. 63, 337 (2015).
  62. S. Hartmann, N. Momčilović, and A. Friedrich, Multi-photon quantum Rabi models with center-of-mass motion, arXiv:2507.04829.
  63. Up to a global phase, the Heisenberg- and interaction-picture field operators differ only by a phase factor, namely, Ψ̂n,H(q,λ)=exp[(−1)nΔωt/2]Ψ̂n(q,λ).
  64. P. Feldmann, F. Anders, A. Idel, C. Schubert, D. Schlippert, L. Santos, E. M. Rasel, and C. Klempt, Optimal squeezing for high-precision atom interferometers, arXiv:2311.10241.
  65. J. Schwinger, On Angular Momentum, Dover Books on Physics (Dover Publications, Mineola, NY, 2015).
  66. J.-N. Kirsten-Siemß, F. Fitzek, C. Schubert, E. M. Rasel, N. Gaaloul, and K. Hammerer, Large-momentum-transfer atom interferometers with μrad-accuracy using Bragg diffraction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 033602 (2023).
  67. In our perturbative treatment, the matrix elements contain ɛ-dependent amplitudes as well as trigonometric functions with ɛ-dependent frequencies. To obtain the matrix elements to second-order accuracy in ɛ, we apply power counting to the amplitudes and only keep terms up to second order in ɛ, while preserving trigonometric functions, as they do not contribute to the power counting. Expanding them would reintroduce secular terms that are carefully avoided [58] within the perturbative treatment of Appendix pp1.
  68. W. P. Schleich, D. M. Greenberger, and E. M. Rasel, A representation-free description of the Kasevich–Chu interferometer: a resolution of the redshift controversy, New J. Phys. 15, 013007 (2013).
  69. N. Funai and E. Martín-Martínez, Faster-than-light signaling in the rotating-wave approximation, Phys. Rev. D 100, 065021 (2019).
  70. F. T. Arecchi, E. Courtens, R. Gilmore, and H. Thomas, Atomic coherent states in quantum optics, Phys. Rev. A 6, 2211 (1972).
  71. G. S. Agarwal, Relation between atomic coherent-state representation, state multipoles, and generalized phase-space distributions, Phys. Rev. A 24, 2889 (1981).
  72. J. P. Dowling, G. S. Agarwal, and W. P. Schleich, Wigner distribution of a general angular-momentum state: Applications to a collection of two-level atoms, Phys. Rev. A 49, 4101 (1994).
  73. A. Sørensen, L.-M. Duan, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Many-particle entanglement with Bose–Einstein condensates, Nature (London) 409, 63 (2001).
  74. D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, F. L. Moore, and D. J. Heinzen, Spin squeezing and reduced quantum noise in spectroscopy, Phys. Rev. A 46, R6797 (1992).
  75. L. Pezzé and A. Smerzi, Entanglement, nonlinear dynamics, and the Heisenberg limit, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 100401(2009).
  76. G.-R. Jin, Y.-C. Liu, and W.-M. Liu, Spin squeezing in a generalized one-axis twisting model, New J. Phys. 11, 073049 (2009).
  77. T. Kovachy, J. M. Hogan, A. Sugarbaker, S. M. Dickerson, C. A. Donnelly, C. Overstreet, and M. A. Kasevich, Matter wave lensing to picokelvin temperatures, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 143004 (2015).
  78. SciPy documentation: scipy.integrate.solve_ivp, https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy/reference/generated/scipy.integrate.solve_ivp.html, accessed 28 March 2026.
  79. O. R. de Araujo, L. S. Marinho, J. F. G. Santos, and C. H. S. Vieira, Towards gravimetry enhancement with squeezed states, Phys. Rev. A 113, L020401 (2026).
  80. D. Linnemann, H. Strobel, W. Muessel, J. Schulz, R. J. Lewis-Swan, K. V. Kheruntsyan, and M. K. Oberthaler, Quantum-enhanced sensing based on time reversal of nonlinear dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 013001 (2016).
  81. M. Schulte, V. J. Martínez-Lahuerta, M. S. Scharnagl, and K. Hammerer, Ramsey interferometry with generalized one-axis twisting echoes, Quantum 4, 268 (2020).
  82. J. Bringewatt, L. Zaporski, M. Radzihovsky, J. Albert, A. V. Gorshkov, V. Vuletic, and G. Bentsen, Butterfly echo protocol for axis-agnostic Heisenberg-limited metrology, arXiv:2602.23332.
  83. C. Bordé, Atomic interferometry with internal state labelling, Phys. Lett. A 140, 10 (1989).
  84. T. Kim, O. Pfister, M. J. Holland, J. Noh, and J. L. Hall, Influence of decorrelation on Heisenberg-limited interferometry with quantum correlated photons, Phys. Rev. A 57, 4004 (1998).
  85. C. M. Karres, Code repository for “Balancing quasi-Bragg regime and velocity selectivity in quantum-enhanced atom interferometry” [software], Zenodo, 2026, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.21786457.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033247– Published 31 August, 2026
  • Received 20 May 2026
  • Accepted 3 August 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation